I track people who are disrupting the world of mobile technology. Non-conformists, innovators and agitators are this blog's unsung heroes, from entrepreneurs to scientists, to rebellious hackers. I'm the author of "We Are Anonymous: Inside the Hacker World of LulzSec, Anonymous and the Global Cyber Insurgency", (Little Brown, 2012) which The New York Times called a "lively, startling book that reads as 'The Social Network' for group hackers." I recently relocated to Forbes' San Francisco office, and was previously Forbes' London bureau chief from 2008-12, interviewing British billionaires like Philip Green and controversial figures like Mohammed Al Fayed; I wrote last year's billionaires cover story on Russia's Yuri Milner, and have broken stories like the Facebook-Spotify partnership in 2011. Before all this I had stints at the BBC and as a radio journalist. You can watch me on 'The Daily Show' here. If you have a story idea or tip, e-mail me at polson@forbes.com or follow me on Twitter: parmy.

If you’re seeking an example of economic disruption, look no further than the Federal Trade Commission’s designs for Wi-Fi networks that cover large swathes of the United States. A proposal pending before an FCC panel aims to make access to the Internet and phone calls free and easy for millions of people across the United States. There’s a big if here. Having already run the political gauntlet for years, the proposal would face a logistical nightmare if approved.

But traditional mobile network carriers are apparently not taking any chances.

According to a much-hyped story in the Washington Post today, lobbyists representing the $178 billion wireless industry have been counteracting the proposal, with the primary detractors reportedly being AT&T, Intel, T-Mobile and Qualcomm.

The FCC’s project has been in the works for some time — known less dramatically as the White Space proposal — but the Post’s story highlights direct lobbying efforts by nervous detractors in the wireless industry. Which means someone somewhere is taking the FCC’s attempts seriously.

In a nutshell, the FCC is proposing that free WiFi be extended to nearly every metropolitan area in the United States, along with “many rural areas,” according to the Post. There’s not much detail on how it would accomplish this, other than that it would force local TV stations to sell chunks of airwave spectrum rights to the U.S. government, which would then use them for public Wi-Fi networks. (More on that from the FCC here.) The proposal is being considered by a five-person panel and still requires approval to move forward.

Idealistic echoes of free, nationwide healthcare aside, such a move would dramatically alter the corporate dynamics of mobile communication if it actually worked. It would draw a clearer battle line between traditional cellular networks and Internet companies. On the one side, carriers want to cling on to financial control of the airwaves, while on the other, Internet giants like Google want it free and increasingly populated by people using their services.

The carriers’s contentions are clear: the spectre of free calls over the Internet would cripple their traditional business of enabling calls over their own network and spectrum. It would follow the bleeding that’s already happening in SMS revenues. Thanks to the rise of mobile messaging services like WhatsApp, Pinger and GroupMe, which use the Internet to send free text messages, carriers like AT&T and T-Mobile have already lost hundreds of millions in potential profits. They still make money data transfers for those messages, but nowhere near as much as they once did with traditional texts.

Why is Qualcomm — a mobile chipmaker whose fortunes are largely twined with those of handset makers like Samsung and HTC — joining in the critics? Because its flagship Snapdragon chip is currently the only mobile processor that integrates LTE functionality on the chip. Qualcomm’s fortunes are thus also tied with the move to LTE, or high-speed 4G data transfer, as a standard for mobile communication.

Now for the advocates. Google and Microsoft are both part of the Wireless Innovation Alliance, a support group for the FCC’s initiative which also includes Dell and the New America Foundation. Google stands to benefit significantly if more people start using its services to browse the web over sprawling, free WiFi networks, or make phone and video calls calls via free services Google Voice or Google Hangouts.

Google has said publicly that mass, free WiFi would spark an explosion in innovation. Of course it would also lead to a bigger financial opportunity for selling ads, both through search or in other innovative ways. Just imagine what faster, nationwide WiFi could mean for live broadcasts online, via Google Hangouts, which could include nationwide ads that are “televised” over that the Internet to tablets and smartphones.

Then there’s Google’s self-driving car project. ThePost reported that “the new WiFi networks would also have much farther reach, allowing for a driverless car to communicate with another vehicle a mile away.” This is conjecture, but if Google has been in talks with the U.S. government about developing the network infrastructure for self-driving cars on U.S. roads, free, nationwide WiFi would boost such a project.

Despite their lobbying efforts, carriers will be particularly unnerved by Google. The planet’s largest Internet company has a loud voice in Washington, D.C., and it has already been conducting experiments with Google Fiber in Kansas City to provide broadband and WiFi coverage that is faster than that of traditional carriers. The endgame sees Google and other Internet companies gradually pushing traditional carriers out of their coveted role in mobile telecommunications. A big key to unlock that is the prevalence of free WiFi.

“Carriers have a super important role, but WiFi has a super important role that’s growing,” said David Morken, CEO of Republic Wireless, a company selling smartphones that natively make calls over WiFi (when it’s available) before switching to the Sprint network when it is not. “We shouldn’t have to spend the outrageous amounts we have to spend today, and we shouldn’t be limited in the user experience that we’re limited to. Let’s all be honest, we have WiFi most of the time.” If the FCC’s plan goes ahead, we’d have it all the time.

There are reasons to be skeptical. The FCC ’s proposal is not new, and has been running the political gauntlet since around 2004, and the federal agency has not released practical details of its proposal. Dan Frommer of SplatF says the news is more in the realm of “science fiction,” and Dylan Tweney of The Verge points out that the logistics of a nationwide WiFi would be a massive undertaking:

This idea also has an enormous logistical barrier to overcome. Municipal Wi-Fi projects, which aim to blanket entire cities in wireless signals, have often foundered on the complexities of deploying usable signals across just a few square miles. As anyone who has attended a tech conference knows, it’s possible — but surprisingly rare — for a well-managed Wi-Fi network to serve just a few hundred people. Expand the pool to a few million or a hundreds of millions and you may face technical challenges that have not even been imagined yet.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

I don’t agree: how much could carriers lose? Maybe there is some rural area that doesn’t have internet access. But if they get that access they’ll have to pay for it, no? And the users will only be able to make a “free” voice call from home. What happens when you walk 500 ft away from your access point? Oops, you probably want that cellular service. As for urban areas, the “free” internet service is widespread. See Starbucks. Do you see people stopping there just to make “free” voice calls? No way. The point of a mobile telephone is to be mobile and that means cellular access. How is expanded wifi coverage going to change that?

Yeah, cellular carriers aren’t getting revenue from text messages sent over the internet. So what? Users are just using their phones to do what they were doing with their computers before. Besides cellular carriers were/are overcharging for text messaging: serves them right.

Bottom line: if you want your “mobile” phone to work when you walk away from your house (or Starbucks) you’ll need a cellular plan. How does anyone see more wifi changing that?

Sounds like the traditional old duopolies have some competing to do. We are already so far behind Europe in coverage, speed and cost it’s not even funny. To continue to allow “traditional” carriers to dictate the speed and accessibility of the network will only increase that gap. Make AT&T compete. They managed once before. I’m sure somewhere in there someone remembers how.

AT&T wont compete… their still pissed that the government broke up their mono.. otherwise we would see competition like crazy..

Hopefully with T-Mobile’s reframing and all the money being spent.. and lets not forget Sprint/Softbank deal and dish, maybe just maybe theirs hope to force the big two to compete against the smaller… the unfair advantage though is that AT&T and Verizon have such a swamp of spectrum its gonna be a challenge for even T-Mobile and Sprint

The FCC attempting to give free public access to Americans nationwide is not a benevolent act. They are laying the ground work for a string regalatory policies to follow. Free WiFi does not equal free and open internet accesss, but rather the contrary. Take the roads and freeways for example, look at all the regualtions and power the Fed Gov weilds because of their funding and maintenance of inter- and intrastate intracacies. FCC wants the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution to apply to the internet.

“Expand the pool to a few million or a hundreds of millions and you may face technical challenges that have not even been imagined yet.”

Actually, they have been imagined…Metricom went bankrupt after spending tens of billions of Paul Allen’s money trying to roll-out a nationwide network using the same ISM frequencies that WiFi uses today. The challenge of scale cannot be under-estimated.